On 5/17/05, Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Timothy, > > On Tuesday 17 May 2005 16:20, Timothy Miller wrote: > > On 5/17/05, Peter Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sat, 14 May 2005, Timothy Miller wrote: > > > > You'll be able to do this already. Honestly, I don't think the > > > > RTL is going to tell anyone anything they don't already know. > > > > You know the register structure, and you know the general > > > > pipelining. What you don't know (and don't care about) is > > > > exactly how many pipeline stages are required for, say, the > > > > texture unit. Some readers will be interested in how I break it > > > > down, but the RTL will be much less useful as documentation than > > > > the documentation that you'll already have, in terms of useful > > > > programmers' reference. > > > > > > Ok, I just thought that if people have access to it they can do > > > incremental improvements... > > > > And that is one of the primary reasons that I plan on releasing it > > under GPL, at an appropriate time. > > Just for the record: I'm really pleased to hear this, and it could very > well help land some project financing. When the GPL RTL is available, > we can also expect to see a number of experienced hardware hackers join > the project.
This project, like any other hardware project that tries to go in a similar direction, will have to go through a period of growth and proving itself. When we release the RTL under GPL, there are two things that will be tested. The first is whether or not people will take the public fork of the design and enhance it in productive ways. The second test will be whether or not it can be profitable for us (or someone else) to produce an(other) ASIC based on that. If, as some suggest, it is, then our initially-closed-source approach will fizzle out. If not, then we will continue the same cycle of time-delayed GPL releases with future products. Some believe that releasing it early under GPL will not result in the design being co-opted by another company with more resources. The first problem is that the point is moot, because this decision is primarily intended to stave off the fear that early investors will most certainly have. The second problem is that there is no PROOF that the design won't be co-opted. Indeed, there are many counter-examples, where the first innovator is quickly or slowly crushed by more powerful competitors, even without open source. Those who want to see the RTL early will simply have to be patient and allow the proof of their assertions to happen naturally, in due course, so that future generations will be developed the way they prefer. Our business model is already scary to investors. It's already way too non-traditional for their taste. Let's be conservative where we can, for the time being, so that we can become established and develop momentum that will give us the resources to take even more radical approaches in the future. Just remember, radical change doesn't happen over night, but thousands of baby-steps will take you a lot farther than you might expect. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
